Wednesday 26th August 2015

[refitman]

Morning all.

[ephemerid]

Thank you, Refitman. Good morning, everyone.

There is a fantastic article in the Society pages of the G today -
http://www.guardian.com/society/2015/au ... -uk-carers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(I have every expectation my link won't work...)

6.5 Million carers in the UK provide nursing/social care estimated to be worth £119 Billion a year.
If they all stopped tomorrow, the cost of their work would be more than the annual NHS budget.

I am in awe of these people. (Including our own HindleA)

[yahyah]

Morning.

I wonder if we will see Harvey Proctor's attack on Labour MPs picked up more & more by the right wing press, used as a way to attack the party and particularly Tom Watson if he becomes Deputy ?

Also, interesting tweet:
ExaroNews ‏@ExaroNews 16h16 hours ago
Harvey Proctor confirmed police had asked for voluntary DNA sample, but he refused to supply one. They would have to arrest him, he said.

Also, a bit rich hearing a Tory MP complaining about homophobia when he was a member of the party that introduced Section 28.

[yahyah]

'Harvey Proctor’s Statement Today – and the False Claims about Tom Watson and other MPs'
https://ianpace.wordpress.com/2015/08/2 ... other-mps/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[rebeccariots2]

Morning. A real story of someone who suffered from a sanction on their social security. From this BBC report

Figures suggest Dundee-Glasgow benefit sanctions 'lottery'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-33862498" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

CASE STUDY - Kevin Keen, jobseeker from Dundee
"I started on Jobseekers Allowance in mid-December last year. I got sanctioned on 29 January because I was 15 minutes late for my appointment.
I was homeless at the time, and on that day I was moving from a centre in Dundee up to the Salvation Army. To sanction me for six weeks, made me totally broke.
I have epilepsy and one of the rules of my tablets is to take them with meals, never on an empty stomach. When I was sanctioned, that all went haywire. Because I didn't have money for food, I was taking fits left, right and centre.
I was relying on handouts from my pals, family and foodbanks - it was a nightmare.
The conditions of my Jobseekers Allowances are that I have to go on a computer four to six times a week, use the Universal Jobsmatch website, look at job adverts in the newspaper and go into places to ask if they've got any vacancies.
Yesterday, I was on the computer in the library.
There's a thing you can get to cover the screen to prevent epileptics having seizures at computers or televisions. They don't have that at the library. When I was at the computer, I actually took a seizure.
It feels like if you make any mistake you're going to get sanctioned."

[utopiandreams]

@ephemerid & rebeccariots2

Would you believe that both of you have you have reminded me of tales I could tell, but no I'll not burden you with more of my anecdotes, besides the examples you provide are more than enough, I would merely be adding to them. Let's face it Tories do not acknowledge anecdotal evidence we need facts and figures. Facts and figures? Ha, ha, ha, the reality is that Tories are fucking liars, excuse my parlance.

Since I have commented, I've just looked at my Guardian profile because I'd responded to someone named misanthropy, not political but an obtuse or perverse comment he made of Stephen Hawking. Whilst there noticed a reply from Sue Fewster wanting to use my words. So without further ado I shall repeat them here; they're about an IDS' statement at the dispatch box on 20th July, just another example of his lies...

Yesterday IDS was challenged in the House to explain the reduction of the benefit cap from £26000 to £20000 or £23000 if calculated on median earnings and could he explain the drop in median earnngs during the intervening period. His reply was that the previous cap was based on gross pay and the new on nett after tax and NI. Liar! Liar! Liar!

From the government's Benefit Cap Briefing Paper (20 July 2015) - http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N06294.pdf

Setting the level of the cap

The 2010 Spending Review announced that from 2013 household welfare payments will be capped on the basis of median earnings after tax and national insurance contributions for working households.

Maybe not the most important matter, nevertheless MPs and ministers must be reprimanded for misleading the House. Parliamentary standards have dropped substantially since our acting PM took office. Although IDS is guilty of far worse, it used to be a resigning matter for ministers.

Oh yes, good morning.

Edit: emboldened a heading.

[ohsocynical]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

[utopiandreams]

@ohsocynical

Speaking for myself it's not exactly that we don't experience fear, it usually prompts us to act. Having said that you never quite know how you shall react, I've seen big guys cower when challenged and small ones stand up refusing to lose face. So I guess the real answer to your question lies with the latter example. We're just too fucking proud, perhaps it's the testosterone.

[ohsocynical]

And I swear we had a mini cyclone around 8pm this morning. Calm now thank goodness.

[ephemerid]

Morning. A real story of someone who suffered from a sanction on their social security. From this BBC report

Figures suggest Dundee-Glasgow benefit sanctions 'lottery'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-33862498" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you, Ms.Riots.

From the DWP spokesthing - "We validate every employer that (sic) uses Universal Jobmatch, but they are responsible for managing the vacancies they advertise in the same way they would through any other employment site".

This is risible.

Example - U.K.Recruitment is looking for a "Fit Model".
The job description says this: "Measurement points size 12 Height 172cm B to waist 40.5cm Bust 92 cm C cup....." etc.
It says nothing else - so there is no actual description of the work this "Fit Model" is required to do.
The sidebar notes that this "job" is based in Central London/West End.
There is no wage given.

Clearly, the UJM site is not policed sufficiently to check what the work is, what hours are involved, whether discrimination laws are broken, what the pay is, or who the end employer is. From the vacancy, this "Fit Model" must be female, must have very specific body measurements, and that would appear to be all that's needed.

Back when local jobcentre staff had their own job-broking sections, they would refuse vacancies which were in breach of any employment legislation, did not advertise the hours/wages, or were in any way unsuitable for a government agency to recommend.

There are not 750,000 vacancies advertised on UJM. I don't care what the DWP says. I look on it quite often to see what's going on, and the vast majority of "jobs" there are multiple agency ads which are not specific in any of the things that matter - hours, wages, locations, nature of work, etc. It's a very expensive joke - and is being used almost exclusively by these bloody agencies to get CVs.

It's also a source of sanctioning material - and was set up for that purpose. Failure to apply for 20 non-jobs a fortnight on a crappy site where the DWP can check if you've done what your "adviser" has told you to do will result in a sanction referral. For people who really want to work - ie. most claimants - the way to get a job is by replying to ads which are never on UJM or making speculative targeted approaches to prospective employers in the usual time-honoured fashion. More people find work through friends, family, local contacts, and word of mouth than by any other method - and no claimant can prove they have been doing this.

UJM is part of a cynical and deliberate system aimed at making claiming very difficult to begin with, and if anyone has the cheek to actually get a claim up and running in payment, a way will be found to stop it.

[ohsocynical]

Labour leadership vote crisis: MP calls for urgent review - live
Latest updates as Ian Austin MP says he has no confidence in the Labour leadership contest, while PCS union leader Mark Serwotka is blocked from voting

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -live.html

It honestly feels as if someone's playing silly buggers.

[utopiandreams]

I'm sorry but have just noticed something else, the manner in which Tories misrepresent figures.

... will be capped on the basis of median earnings after tax and national insurance contributions for working households.

An oft repeated statement, but even this is a lie if I'm not mistaken. Working households? I thought that was median wage for individuals not households.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!- Sir Walter Scott.

Edit: inserted ellipsis.

[ephemerid]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

I think they feel they shouldn't show it - however much they feel it - because they see themselves (and/or society has conditioned them to appear) as though they are strong and manly and all that masculine tough stuff. They like to be seen to be protective and brave - and yes, that is a sweeping generalisation.

It's interesting, because I know many men who don't feel the need to do that. In AA, we accept that most of our resentments and anger are based on fear - fear of not fitting in, fear of looking weak or stupid, fear of having what's ours taken away.....and sometimes fear of everything in general and nothing in particular.
I've watched hard ex-cons, men who have very high-powered jobs, all manner of macho types weeping openly in meetings; I've heard them talk honestly about the things they fear and hate the most; and I've witnessed how they change and become emotionally honest as they sober up and learn how to express their feelings.

Courage isn't about not feeling fear or expressing it openly - it's about knowing you are afraid but summoning up the strength to deal with whatever it is you are facing. I know that Show was fearful and nervous last week; he didn't say a lot, but when I asked him if he was worried he answered very honestly.
I take the view that all of us - men and women - find our own ways of dealing with the things we fear. A lot of that is based on our genetic make-up and social/familial influences; it has been my experience and observation that when people put on a brave face and do not share their worries with their nearest and dearest, the latter just worry more than they would if they knew what was going on.

Emotional honesty is not an easy thing if you are of the personality type/generation/whatever that tends to be stoical for stoicism's sake. But I also take the view that there are times when it's best to leave people alone and let them get on with their stuff - sharing is not compulsory. And there is always the possibility that the person involved is actually fearless - some people are.

[refitman]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

Is it because fear leads to the Dark Side?

[AnatolyKasparov]

Meanwhile, it seems that Corbyn has recieved one of his more surprising endorsements for leader - Karen Danczuk.

Can't *possibly* imagine what the possible motivations might be there

[StephenDolan]

Morning all.

The Cooper and Kendall outrage over Corbyn has a whiff of desperation. SegregateGate anyone?

[AnatolyKasparov]

Especially when he just said that it should be an idea that was "considered" and "consulted" on.

That translates to me as "some of my supporters have been making a fuss over this, lets kick it into the long grass".

Hmmm, is Jezza starting to get the hang of this leadership lark?

[SpinningHugo]

.

Hmmm, is Jezza starting to get the hang of this leadership lark?

No.

And I suspect at 66 he is too old to learn.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 71438.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i won't have lots of sympathy for him, but I will have some.

[AnatolyKasparov]

I read that piece (McSmith is genuinely knowledgeable and objective on Labour matters) and its interesting and well argued.

Though the blogger Phil BC has an eloquent alternative position over at his site.

(pretty sure he isn't voting for JC himself btw)

[refitman]

Especially when he just said that it should be an idea that was "considered" and "consulted" on.

That translates to me as "some of my supporters have been making a fuss over this, lets kick it into the long grass".

Hmmm, is Jezza starting to get the hang of this leadership lark?

Which idea is this? Sorry, not following some of the posts this morning very well

I think it's the women only train carriages, to reduce harassment.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Have to agree tbh, would Hugo endorse similar disparaging references to HRC's age?

Its irrelevant, and in some ways could be a positive for JC.

[SpinningHugo]

.

Hmmm, is Jezza starting to get the hang of this leadership lark?

No.

And I suspect at 66 he is too old to learn.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 71438.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i won't have lots of sympathy for him, but I will have some.

Seriously, we're doing ageism openly now?

OK, I've had enough. Go and take a long walk off a very short, very high cliff you preening arsehole.

Being older has lots of advantages. If you have decades of doing something you'll usually have experience that makes you far more valuable at that than someone without.

However, not everything about getting older is great. It is harder to learn new tasks, and if you have little experience of something (eg speaking French) you'll usually perform more poorly at picking it up than someone younger.

I don't think this is ageist.

[StephenDolan]

No.

And I suspect at 66 he is too old to learn.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 71438.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i won't have lots of sympathy for him, but I will have some.

Seriously, we're doing ageism openly now?

OK, I've had enough. Go and take a long walk off a very short, very high cliff you preening arsehole.

Being older has lots of advantages. If you have decades of doing something you'll usually have experience that makes you far more valuable at that than someone without.

However, not everything about getting older is great. It is harder to learn new tasks, and if you have little experience of something (eg speaking French) you'll usually perform more poorly at picking it up than someone younger.

I don't think this is ageist.

Except you said he IS too old to learn. Not usually, probably etc.

[SpinningHugo]

Seriously, we're doing ageism openly now?

OK, I've had enough. Go and take a long walk off a very short, very high cliff you preening arsehole.

Being older has lots of advantages. If you have decades of doing something you'll usually have experience that makes you far more valuable at that than someone without.

However, not everything about getting older is great. It is harder to learn new tasks, and if you have little experience of something (eg speaking French) you'll usually perform more poorly at picking it up than someone younger.

I don't think this is ageist.

Except you said he IS too old to learn. Not usually, probably etc.

To do the task with any degree of skill? Yes, I think he is. He has never had any leadership roles of any significance in his life.

His attitudes in over three decades of public life have also not revealed any degree of intellectual flexibility.

[ohsocynical]

Now you're growing older Hugo, you might personally be finding it difficult to learn new tasks, and I can only sympathise, but I've had no problems in that area. I'm just more choosy about what I take on.
And at 65, Mr Ohso trained for a new career and put the younger women he attended classes with, to shame.

The Tories are a good example of younger men who know nowt of worth.

[ohsocynical]

Meanwhile, it seems that Corbyn has recieved one of his more surprising endorsements for leader - Karen Danczuk.

Can't *possibly* imagine what the possible motivations might be there

That's what they call a double edged sword, isn't it?

[gilsey]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

Why do some young men feel no fear when they're behind the wheel of a car? There was an accident 100 yards down the road last night, car came down the road too fast and couldn't make the right angle bend at the bottom. I didn't hear the crash but saw the blue flashing lights when the emergency services arrived, went out to speak to the policeman to make sure it wasn't mr gilsey, who was at the pub in the next village. One car, with 'some lads' in.
2 fire engines, 3 ambulances as well as the police.
Feeling sorry for the neighbours, who will no doubt have gone out to see if there was anything they could do, other than dial 999. Haven't seen them yet.

On a selfish note, there was an ambulance directly outside our house from midnight till nearly 1, with its blue lights flashing the whole time. Why?

[ohsocynical]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

Is it because fear leads to the Dark Side?

Mr Ohso said he was ashamed because he got scared at what he was being told.

I was gobsmacked when he said, "I know men aren't supposed to get scared. They're supposed to put on a brave face."

I thought we'd progressed somewhat from that attitude.

[Willow904]

It's being assumed all round that Corbyn is going to win. Does anyone know who's done the polls on this? I keep seeing comments about how far ahead he is but I haven't seen anything myself except the general ratings one SH linked the other day which was on popularity with voters in general rather than among those with an actual vote in the contest.

[nickyinnorfolk]

@ephemerid & rebeccariots2

Would you believe that both of you have you have reminded me of tales I could tell, but no I'll not burden you with more of my anecdotes, besides the examples you provide are more than enough, I would merely be adding to them. Let's face it Tories do not acknowledge anecdotal evidence we need facts and figures. Facts and figures? Ha, ha, ha, the reality is that Tories are fucking liars, excuse my parlance.

Since I have commented, I've just looked at my Guardian profile because I'd responded to someone named misanthropy, not political but an obtuse or perverse comment he made of Stephen Hawking. Whilst there noticed a reply from Sue Fewster wanting to use my words. So without further ado I shall repeat them here; they're about an IDS' statement at the dispatch box on 20th July, just another example of his lies...

Yesterday IDS was challenged in the House to explain the reduction of the benefit cap from £26000 to £20000 or £23000 if calculated on median earnings and could he explain the drop in median earnngs during the intervening period. His reply was that the previous cap was based on gross pay and the new on nett after tax and NI. Liar! Liar! Liar!

From the government's Benefit Cap Briefing Paper (20 July 2015) - http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N06294.pdf

Setting the level of the cap

The 2010 Spending Review announced that from 2013 household welfare payments will be capped on the basis of median earnings after tax and national insurance contributions for working households.

Maybe not the most important matter, nevertheless MPs and ministers must be reprimanded for misleading the House. Parliamentary standards have dropped substantially since our acting PM took office. Although IDS is guilty of far worse, it used to be a resigning matter for ministers.

Oh yes, good morning.

Edit: emboldened a heading.

Good morternoon.

I tend to lurk and have been busy as it's the school hols so haven't contributed recently. However, regarding anecdotes, a friend told me something the other day which I thought was a quite striking example of life in Tory Britain. She and her husband should be fairly well off, but their adult children are all struggling in various ways and have to regularly avail themselves of the Bank of Mum and Dad.

Her eldest son struggled to find a job after uni and eventually got himself a job at an upmarket menswear shop (which of course he doesn't need a degree for, but that's another matter) where he's been for a few years now. He's married with two young children. His wife used to work but after suffering a number of miscarriages before having the second baby, she left work and is now a full-time mum. They really struggle on just one wage. My friend told me that whenever they visit (her son lives in Oxfordshire, where his wife's family are based) they take food and also give him money. Last time she was shocked when he admitted that they've now had to resort to visiting a food bank several times in the last few months.

Incidentally, the shop where he works is frequented by hooray henry types who will, typically, pop in to buy 'a few holiday clothes' and merrily tot up a bill for up to a thousand quid. The shop must be doing quite well but my friend's son is as far as I know on a fairly low wage. Oh, and Cameron himself has been a customer there. What a coincidence.

Her son also had a terrible time trying to get child benefit sorted out for his second child, having to spend ages trying to get through to speak to someone at the DWP, which appears to now be in total disarray.

[SpinningHugo]

Seriously, we're doing ageism openly now?

OK, I've had enough. Go and take a long walk off a very short, very high cliff you preening arsehole.

Being older has lots of advantages. If you have decades of doing something you'll usually have experience that makes you far more valuable at that than someone without.

However, not everything about getting older is great. It is harder to learn new tasks, and if you have little experience of something (eg speaking French) you'll usually perform more poorly at picking it up than someone younger.

I don't think this is ageist.

It's a sweeping assumption.

Ever heard of the University of the 3rd Age? Go and do a course on gerontology, you might learn something.

I have heard of it, but I am not sure that retirees taking up things like the piano is really analogous.

You have to look to the US to find politicians who have attained the most important government job at similar ages. So, Reagan was 69 in 1980 (Corbyn will be 71 in 2020). But Reagan had been governor of California for eight years. Age is not necessarily a problem, but age and inexperience is.

Attlee was 62 in 1945, but he'd been deputy PM during the war, and had had many other leadership roles before that.

I am trying to think of an example similar to Corbyn but failing.

Is there anyone we can think of who took on such a major leadership role for the first time at his age and made a success of it?

There must be examples, but my imagination is failing me. I must be getting old.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Especially when he just said that it should be an idea that was "considered" and "consulted" on.

That translates to me as "some of my supporters have been making a fuss over this, lets kick it into the long grass".

Hmmm, is Jezza starting to get the hang of this leadership lark?

Which idea is this? Sorry, not following some of the posts this morning very well

I think it's the women only train carriages, to reduce harassment.

That was just so utterly hopeless I literally stuck my head in my hands to hope I had imagined it. Ed Miliband, Gordon Brown and Neil Kinnock never managed to generate that reaction from me in the years they led the party. He really is useless.

I mean sure Kendall elicits a desire to occasionally throw stuff but she isn't actually going to win.

[Willow904]

@ephemerid & rebeccariots2

Would you believe that both of you have you have reminded me of tales I could tell, but no I'll not burden you with more of my anecdotes, besides the examples you provide are more than enough, I would merely be adding to them. Let's face it Tories do not acknowledge anecdotal evidence we need facts and figures. Facts and figures? Ha, ha, ha, the reality is that Tories are fucking liars, excuse my parlance.

Since I have commented, I've just looked at my Guardian profile because I'd responded to someone named misanthropy, not political but an obtuse or perverse comment he made of Stephen Hawking. Whilst there noticed a reply from Sue Fewster wanting to use my words. So without further ado I shall repeat them here; they're about an IDS' statement at the dispatch box on 20th July, just another example of his lies...

Yesterday IDS was challenged in the House to explain the reduction of the benefit cap from £26000 to £20000 or £23000 if calculated on median earnings and could he explain the drop in median earnngs during the intervening period. His reply was that the previous cap was based on gross pay and the new on nett after tax and NI. Liar! Liar! Liar!

From the government's Benefit Cap Briefing Paper (20 July 2015) - http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N06294.pdf

Setting the level of the cap

The 2010 Spending Review announced that from 2013 household welfare payments will be capped on the basis of median earnings after tax and national insurance contributions for working households.

Maybe not the most important matter, nevertheless MPs and ministers must be reprimanded for misleading the House. Parliamentary standards have dropped substantially since our acting PM took office. Although IDS is guilty of far worse, it used to be a resigning matter for ministers.

Oh yes, good morning.

Edit: emboldened a heading.

Good morternoon.

I tend to lurk and have been busy as it's the school hols so haven't contributed recently. However, regarding anecdotes, a friend told me something the other day which I thought was a quite striking example of life in Tory Britain. She and her husband should be fairly well off, but their adult children are all struggling in various ways and have to regularly avail themselves of the Bank of Mum and Dad.

Her eldest son struggled to find a job after uni and eventually got himself a job at an upmarket menswear shop (which of course he doesn't need a degree for, but that's another matter) where he's been for a few years now. He's married with two young children. His wife used to work but after suffering a number of miscarriages before having the second baby, she left work and is now a full-time mum. They really struggle on just one wage. My friend told me that whenever they visit (her son lives in Oxfordshire, where his wife's family are based) they take food and also give him money. Last time she was shocked when he admitted that they've now had to resort to visiting a food bank several times in the last few months.

Incidentally, the shop where he works is frequented by hooray henry types who will, typically, pop in to buy 'a few holiday clothes' and merrily tot up a bill for up to a thousand quid. The shop must be doing quite well but my friend's son is as far as I know on a fairly low wage. Oh, and Cameron himself has been a customer there. What a coincidence.

Her son also had a terrible time trying to get child benefit sorted out for his second child, having to spend ages trying to get through to speak to someone at the DWP, which appears to now be in total disarray.

If he was trying to sort out child tax credits, that would be HMRC, who have made the news lately for their poor phone answering record. It took me 40 mins to get through to them recently and it cost me a fiver. Child benefit used to be separately administered by the DWP and when it was universal the registrar would give you the info to apply for it when you registered your first baby and it was extremely straightforward to get - now it's means tested, HMRC are also involved and it's becoming far more complicated. What I particularly dislike about this bunch of Tories is not so much the cuts to the value of benefits, which are at least in the public domain and have been voted for, as the lengths to which they go to hinder people from obtaining benefits they are fully entitled to. Sanctions are merely the cruelest example of what is a general trend towards stealthily obstructing people's access to social security and essential services. It's extremely underhand and dishonest and the government has no mandate to behave in this way.

[refitman]

Which idea is this? Sorry, not following some of the posts this morning very well

I think it's the women only train carriages, to reduce harassment.

That was just so utterly hopeless I literally stuck my head in my hands to hope I had imagined it. Ed Miliband, Gordon Brown and Neil Kinnock never managed to generate that reaction from me in the years they led the party. He really is useless.

I mean sure Kendall elicits a desire to occasionally throw stuff but she isn't actually going to win.

He was asked about it and said it would be a consideration:

Consultation on public transport
Some women have raised with me that a solution to the rise in assault and harassment on public transport could be to introduce women only carriages. My intention would be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform, to the bus stop to on the mode of transport itself. However, I would consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether women-only carriages would be welcome - and also if piloting this at times and modes of transport where harassment is reported most frequently would be of interest.

http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/end_street_harassment" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is one part of a bigger thing and people have just jumped on it screaming "JC wants segregation". I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, to be honest.

[refitman]

Fuck me! Headline on Cif:

Ladies! You won’t be leading the Labour party, so here’s a women-only train carriage

I know it's Ann Perkins, but FFS.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Being older has lots of advantages. If you have decades of doing something you'll usually have experience that makes you far more valuable at that than someone without.

However, not everything about getting older is great. It is harder to learn new tasks, and if you have little experience of something (eg speaking French) you'll usually perform more poorly at picking it up than someone younger.

I don't think this is ageist.

It's a sweeping assumption.

Ever heard of the University of the 3rd Age? Go and do a course on gerontology, you might learn something.

I have heard of it, but I am not sure that retirees taking up things like the piano is really analogous.

You have to look to the US to find politicians who have attained the most important government job at similar ages. So, Reagan was 69 in 1980 (Corbyn will be 71 in 2020). But Reagan had been governor of California for eight years. Age is not necessarily a problem, but age and inexperience is.

Attlee was 62 in 1945, but he'd been deputy PM during the war, and had had many other leadership roles before that.

I am trying to think of an example similar to Corbyn but failing.

Is there anyone we can think of who took on such a major leadership role for the first time at his age and made a success of it?

There must be examples, but my imagination is failing me. I must be getting old.

While I don't endorse the general principle that people can't learn new stuff at any age, they can and do all the time. But people here are expecting Corbyn to change his entire personality and in my experience that is kind of fixed at about 30. I think that is rather more Hugo's point.

We don't stick an untrained person in an airliner at 40,000 feet and tell them to fly it, at any age. His total lack of any leadership experience (most people here have rather more) tells a story.

That Indy article, apart from the nasty last line, is bang on. I do expect Corbyn to accept full responsibility in a heartfelt speech from the wreckage of an utterly defeated party.

[nickyinnorfolk]

@ephemerid & rebeccariots2

Would you believe that both of you have you have reminded me of tales I could tell, but no I'll not burden you with more of my anecdotes, besides the examples you provide are more than enough, I would merely be adding to them. Let's face it Tories do not acknowledge anecdotal evidence we need facts and figures. Facts and figures? Ha, ha, ha, the reality is that Tories are fucking liars, excuse my parlance.

Since I have commented, I've just looked at my Guardian profile because I'd responded to someone named misanthropy, not political but an obtuse or perverse comment he made of Stephen Hawking. Whilst there noticed a reply from Sue Fewster wanting to use my words. So without further ado I shall repeat them here; they're about an IDS' statement at the dispatch box on 20th July, just another example of his lies...

Yesterday IDS was challenged in the House to explain the reduction of the benefit cap from £26000 to £20000 or £23000 if calculated on median earnings and could he explain the drop in median earnngs during the intervening period. His reply was that the previous cap was based on gross pay and the new on nett after tax and NI. Liar! Liar! Liar!

From the government's Benefit Cap Briefing Paper (20 July 2015) - http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N06294.pdf
Maybe not the most important matter, nevertheless MPs and ministers must be reprimanded for misleading the House. Parliamentary standards have dropped substantially since our acting PM took office. Although IDS is guilty of far worse, it used to be a resigning matter for ministers.

Oh yes, good morning.

Edit: emboldened a heading.

Good morternoon.

I tend to lurk and have been busy as it's the school hols so haven't contributed recently. However, regarding anecdotes, a friend told me something the other day which I thought was a quite striking example of life in Tory Britain. She and her husband should be fairly well off, but their adult children are all struggling in various ways and have to regularly avail themselves of the Bank of Mum and Dad.

Her eldest son struggled to find a job after uni and eventually got himself a job at an upmarket menswear shop (which of course he doesn't need a degree for, but that's another matter) where he's been for a few years now. He's married with two young children. His wife used to work but after suffering a number of miscarriages before having the second baby, she left work and is now a full-time mum. They really struggle on just one wage. My friend told me that whenever they visit (her son lives in Oxfordshire, where his wife's family are based) they take food and also give him money. Last time she was shocked when he admitted that they've now had to resort to visiting a food bank several times in the last few months.

Incidentally, the shop where he works is frequented by hooray henry types who will, typically, pop in to buy 'a few holiday clothes' and merrily tot up a bill for up to a thousand quid. The shop must be doing quite well but my friend's son is as far as I know on a fairly low wage. Oh, and Cameron himself has been a customer there. What a coincidence.

Her son also had a terrible time trying to get child benefit sorted out for his second child, having to spend ages trying to get through to speak to someone at the DWP, which appears to now be in total disarray.

If he was trying to sort out child tax credits, that would be HMRC, who have made the news lately for their poor phone answering record. It took me 40 mins to get through to them recently and it cost me a fiver. Child benefit used to be separately administered by the DWP and when it was universal the registrar would give you the info to apply for it when you registered your first baby and it was extremely straightforward to get - now it's means tested, HMRC are also involved and it's becoming far more complicated. What I particularly dislike about this bunch of Tories is not so much the cuts to the value of benefits, which are at least in the public domain and have been voted for, as the lengths to which they go to hinder people from obtaining benefits they are fully entitled to. Sanctions are merely the cruelest example of what is a general trend towards stealthily obstructing people's access to social security and essential services. It's extremely underhand and dishonest and the government has no mandate to behave in this way.

Yes, you're right - my friend was saying her son had been on the phone, repeatedly, for ages re child benefit and I just assumed it was the DWP rather than HMRC.

As you say, it's despicable behaviour.

[AnatolyKasparov]

People like TE and Hugo should be asking why JC is by all indications about to win (and possibly win big) despite his obvious drawbacks.

Its part of a wider thing throughout the West, for a start.

People *loathe* politics as it is practiced now. Utterly, profoundly despise it on a visceral level (and as I said the other day, the minority who don't already have Hamface to vote for)

Corbyn, Trump, Sanders, Syriza, Podemos, even UKIP - all part of the same thing.

[pk1]

Here's what Hugo said:

And I suspect at 66 he is too old to learn.

And I suspect

Personal opinion, same as each one of us has but because it's Hugo, it's attack attack attack.



Andy McSmith's piece is spot on - Corbyn has never assumed responsibility for anything major in his entire political life yet we're on the brink of having him assume the most important role within Labour.

Still, there's a bandwagon rolling, hop aboard folks.

[Willow904]

I think it's the women only train carriages, to reduce harassment.

That was just so utterly hopeless I literally stuck my head in my hands to hope I had imagined it. Ed Miliband, Gordon Brown and Neil Kinnock never managed to generate that reaction from me in the years they led the party. He really is useless.

I mean sure Kendall elicits a desire to occasionally throw stuff but she isn't actually going to win.

He was asked about it and said it would be a consideration:

Consultation on public transport
Some women have raised with me that a solution to the rise in assault and harassment on public transport could be to introduce women only carriages. My intention would be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform, to the bus stop to on the mode of transport itself. However, I would consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether women-only carriages would be welcome - and also if piloting this at times and modes of transport where harassment is reported most frequently would be of interest.

http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/end_street_harassment" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is one part of a bigger thing and people have just jumped on it screaming "JC wants segregation". I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, to be honest.

I think the press are just trying to jump on anything they can present as flaky, but Corbyn isn't really shaping up as a quotable Farage type, so I personally think they are stretching this a bit. It doesn't seem that wacky a thing to consider to me. We used to have a night women's bus when I was a college and I'm sure a lot of unis would still have them. There has always been issues with women being able to use public transport safely late at night and while on buses you at least have the driver with you, on trains you can end up on your own once you leave the station. A carriage late at night that the platform porter can ensure is only boarded by women isn't wacky as an idea, it's just ambitious in terms of costs. I suspect the right-wing press are more freaked out at the radical suggestion of investment in public transport than they are by the idea of trying to keep women safe!

[utopiandreams]

@nickyinnorfolk

Thanks for another example, nucky, albeit one close to your heart that deserves far better. Time was a working man could support his family, put a roof over their heads, feed and clothe the kids. Firstly I'd better make clear that I demand equality in the workplace, my own mother worked full time even when we were young. Back then young kiddies were allowed out unsupervised provided they were back for tea and indeed stay at home with a kindly neighbour keeping an eye out or available if necessary. In my own case I guess I were quite young and partly responsible for my siblings my being the eldest. During school holidays we had used to go to a woman who took kids in, but she'd go out and leave her 14 year old son in charge. He was a bully and played perverted games lining us all up in our underwear making us tweak the waistbands of the opposite sex for a peek. He would do so to all of us too, even chalk mathematical sums on a blackboard and make us take turns solving them and hit those who failed to do them correctly. Even as a five or six year old I could put him to shame but that's another story. We kids had to do all the woman's housework too.

Of course we'd tell our parents but they didn't believe us even though all three of us stuck to the same story. Eventually and as I say I was probably six or seven by then I was left in charge. I have no idea whether or not they finally believed us, nevertheless they did appreciate how unhappy we were to go there. Frankly the childminder should have been reported, I know not if she were.

I've gone off on one again, haven't I? Back to today, 'scrounging workless' households are what I wish to address. Poor old Mum and Dad cannot find work <tory>it's a lifestyle choice</tory>, but the kids have grown up now so are no longer dependents. Bloody hell are there no jobs for the young? No worries social security shall help, but they cannot claim any housing benefit, but why should they expect to leave home whilst not working? I'm pretty damn sure that unless there are extenuating circumstances they wouldn't, but let's say they do and do not deserve hard-working tax-payers money.

Anyway as they've stopped at home and claim their JSA (until sanctioned that is) any Housing Benefit that Mum and Dad get shall be reduced by 20 odd quid per person. Is the youngster expected to cover the shortfall out of what is it 50 something pounds? 'And I haven't even begun to consider illness or disability yet.

Cameron disgusts me, a multi millionaire who claimed DLA for his infant... 'And then there's the Bedroom Tax that he repeatedly stated would not affect the disabled. Talk about a greedy fucker. 'And again I must apologise for my language. Sorry if I sometimes appear more forgiving of IDS, it's just that I truly think he is thick. Lack of nouse in Cameron's case, but no such excuse.

[rebeccariots2]

I'm having to remind myself on a daily - if not hourly - basis to stay calm and try not to be too affected by the media hysteria over just about every aspect of the Labour leadership contest. Every thing that could be is being blown up into mega proportions - it's totally unhelpful. None of them are monsters. All of the candidates have said some things that have been seized on and made as extreme as possible by the media and various factions. It's not helpful.

It's certainly not worth falling out with others over. Then the media and those who want to shit stir over Labour as much as they can have achieved their aim and fostered even more division.

[refitman]

I'm having to remind myself on a daily - if not hourly - basis to stay calm and try not to be too affected by the media hysteria over just about every aspect of the Labour leadership contest. Every thing that could be is being blown up into mega proportions - it's totally unhelpful. None of them are monsters. All of the candidates have said some things that have been seized on and made as extreme as possible by the media and various factions. It's not helpful.

It's certainly not worth falling out with others over. Then the media and those who want to shit stir over Labour as much as they can have achieved their aim and fostered even more division.

This^^^. Very much this.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Fuck me! Headline on Cif:

Ladies! You won’t be leading the Labour party, so here’s a women-only train carriage

I know it's Ann Perkins, but FFS.

Does she even really believe that pile of crap herself?

And given the obvious inference in that headline, no prizes for guessing who she is backing for leader eh?

Have become so hacked off with the constant "you have to vote for Yvette because she is a woman" dog whistling from the Cooper team that she is now going bottom of my ballot paper (she was probably going to be 2nd initially) For all her failings as a candidate and ghastly tone deaf campaign, Kendall has indulged in that sort of crude emotional blackmail far far less - and shown herself to actually have some principles whether or not you agree with them, rather than just being another calculating machine politician. Looking like AB-LK-JC for me now

[ephemerid]

Fuck me! Headline on Cif:

Ladies! You won’t be leading the Labour party, so here’s a women-only train carriage

I know it's Ann Perkins, but FFS.

OMG!!!!!!!

She has white hair!!!!! She must be really really old!!!!! Cripes - she's over 60!!!!

Pointless arguing with her - she can't LEARN anything, you see.

For the people her who seriously believe that being older and not having any experience in the job one is applying for is a bad thing, perhaps they might like to consider that some of us might like to see someone with life experience and empathy in a leadership role.

Nobody knows how the decrepit elderly non-kowtowing-to-the-status-quo generally falling-to-bits Mr.Corbyn would fare in a new job.
Nobody knows how the younger but not-set-in-their-hubristic-ways (erm...) and muscular fit incredibly intelligent (?) others would either.

Nobody is asking this man to pilot a plane. Nobody is asking this man to run the country now. Nobody is asking this man to do owt.

He has chosen to stand up and ask his party to nominate him for a leadership contest. They duly obliged.
He has chosen to speak all over the country, and a lot of people have chosen to listen to what he has to say.
He has chosen to put forward ideas and a vision that people seem to be connecting with.
He has chosen not to engage in petty name-calling whatever the provocation.
He has chosen to conduct himself in a manner becoming to others who could learn from his example.

The people not doing the learning here are the other candidates who appear stuck in some New Labour time warp.
The people not doing the learning here are the party heirarchy who are engaged in some Spaddish Inquisition.
The people not doing the learning are both the above who are treating their own electoral system with utter contempt.

Corbyn is not too old to be open to ideas; he is not too old to be zapping around London on his bike; he is not too old to be travelling the length and breadth of the country on a daily basis; he is not too old to maintain his passion and energy in speeches and rallies he's attending every day; he's not too old to lead his party and he's not too old to marshal support. As the evidence shows.

I have read some patronising twaddle here on occasion, but this takes the biscuit. "Too old to learn" my arse. How dare you?

[ohsocynical]

I think it's the women only train carriages, to reduce harassment.

That was just so utterly hopeless I literally stuck my head in my hands to hope I had imagined it. Ed Miliband, Gordon Brown and Neil Kinnock never managed to generate that reaction from me in the years they led the party. He really is useless.

I mean sure Kendall elicits a desire to occasionally throw stuff but she isn't actually going to win.

He was asked about it and said it would be a consideration:

Consultation on public transport
Some women have raised with me that a solution to the rise in assault and harassment on public transport could be to introduce women only carriages. My intention would be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform, to the bus stop to on the mode of transport itself. However, I would consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether women-only carriages would be welcome - and also if piloting this at times and modes of transport where harassment is reported most frequently would be of interest.

http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/end_street_harassment" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is one part of a bigger thing and people have just jumped on it screaming "JC wants segregation". I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, to be honest.

The stupidity of some people is beyond belief.
If there's a need, and he's happy to consult and act on the results, then I think it's a bloody good idea. Travelling, especially late at night, makes a lot of women nervous. If women only carriages are provided and women don't want to travel in them, it's a free country. They wouldn't have to.

[citizenJA]

Off topic, but as we have some lovely gents on this board can I ask:

Why do men think they shouldn't feel fear?

Is it because fear leads to the Dark Side?

Unacknowledged fear leads to the Dark Side.

Good-afternoon, everyone.

[nickyinnorfolk]

I didn't support Corbyn in the leadership poll (I voted for Cooper) but I do quite admire Corbyn's assertive manner with interviewers. Labour politicians have, in my view, been a bit too accommodating and polite with snotty and hostile political journalists who do everything they can to trip them up by constant interrupting or bringing up stuff which they think will embarrass them.

Whether that means he can convince Middle England to vote for him remains to be seen. He will need to be very forthright about defending Labour's economic record, which Ed (despite his other qualities) did not do - although to be fair almost the entire media was peddling the Tory and LibDem lies about Labour supposedly crashing the economy. Corbyn needs to understand that Middle England realise that the Tories are bastards - unfortunately they haven't cottoned on to the fact that they're ALSO total incompetents.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Tbh I am thinking of joining Robert in taking a break from here until Sept 12, tbh.

I have family and friends who are voting for Corbyn as leader - they aren't "nutters", they aren't "entryists", they aren't unworldly dreamers who hate Labour being in power and winning elections, or are caught up in some reason-free "bandwagon". They are doing so for entirely rational and - yes - understandable reasons. They are doing so well aware of his failings and foibles, and that he doesn't offer some magical miraculous solution.

They are doing so because THINGS NEED TO CHANGE - the very future of the Labour party depends on that. Where I disagree with them is that I don't think it is necessary to vote for JC to do that, but I can understand them disagreeing given the sheer awfulness of the 3 "mainstream" campaigns.

Corbyn's leadership could be a car crash from day one as the likes of McSmith assert - if so he won't last long and his chances of leading Labour into the GE (even if he wants to, whch is far from a given) are precisely zero. Or some good could actually come out of it. Those who wish the left well should desire the latter.

Now let's calm down, everybody

[rebeccariots2]

Safe seats should be abolished to modernise '19th century political system', says think tank
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 71615.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;